Last Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a ruling that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had erred in rulemaking concerning broadband-over-power line (BPL) technology. Over two years ago when setting rules for BPL operators, the FCC espoused a policy encouraging deployment of a so-called “third-pipe” as a way to speed broadband access to those areas of the U.S. that are still underserved. At the same time, it established limits aimed at protecting public safety, maritime, radio-astronomy, aeronautical navigation, and amateur radio operators from possible harmful interference. The ARRL, representing American amateur radio, promptly sued the agency. During its rulemaking process, the FCC relied on five scientific studies that measure the emissions of BPL devices, in an attempt to determine interference risks for other users of the spectrum. The agency released those studies during the public comment process required by federal law, but redacted certain parts of them and argued that these were simply internal communications that had no influence on FCC deliberations. ARRL attorneys argued that it had acted in violation of federal law procedures in not releasing the studies in their entirety. Last week, a three-judge panel agreed. Writing for the court, Judge Judith Rogers noted, “It is one thing for the Commission to give notice and make available for comment the studies on which it relied in formulating the rule while explaining its non-reliance on certain parts. It is quite another thing to provide notice and opportunity for comment on only those parts of the studies the Commission likes best.” The entire 38-page decision can be viewed online. BPL was long touted as the “Last Mile” solution. Do you see this controversy being resolved in the immediate future, or are the interference problems more challenging than we think. Post your views the Telecommunications Community Forums.
Appeals Court Holds That FCC Erred in Its Rulemaking on BPL Interference
